-
Drug Design, Development and Therapy 2021In this article, we conduct a systematic review of the literature to explore the specific role of dexmedetomidine (DEX) on postoperative sleep and its associated...
In this article, we conduct a systematic review of the literature to explore the specific role of dexmedetomidine (DEX) on postoperative sleep and its associated mechanisms at present. The electronic database Embase, MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched. The restriction terms included "dexmedetomidine", "sleep" and "surgery". The inclusion criteria were as following: 1) patients 18 years old or older; 2) DEX used in the perioperative period not just for critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU); 3) prospective or retrospective studies. The review articles, conference abstracts, and animal studies were excluded. Out of the 22 articles which met the above criteria, 20 of them were randomized controlled studies and 2 of them were retrospective cohort studies. Infusion of DEX including during the surgery and after surgery at a low or high dose was shown to improve subjective and objective sleep quality, although 2 studies showed there is no evidence that the use of DEX improves sleep quality and 1 showed less sleep efficiency and shorter total sleep time in the DEX group. Other postoperative outcomes evaluated postoperative nausea and vomiting, pain, postoperative delirium bradycardia and hypotension. Outcomes of our systematic review showed that DEX has advantages in improving patients' postoperative sleep quality. Combined with the use of general anesthetic, DEX provides a reliable choice for procedural sedation.
Topics: Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Animals; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Sleep
PubMed: 34045850
DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S304162 -
Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and... Dec 2022The leading cause of emergence delirium (ED) in children postoperatively is the exposure to inhalational anaesthetics. ED can occur immediately after waking from... (Review)
Review
The efficacy and safety of dexmedetomidine in preventing emergence delirium in paediatric patients following ophthalmic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
The leading cause of emergence delirium (ED) in children postoperatively is the exposure to inhalational anaesthetics. ED can occur immediately after waking from anaesthesia, making patients generally uncooperative and agitated. Dexmedetomidine has sedative and analgesic effects and helps to reduce agitation and delirium and improve hemodynamic stability and the recovery of respiratory function; in addition to decreasing pain intensity, it is also well known for helping reduce nausea and vomiting.
OBJECTIVES
This updated systematic review meta-analysis investigate and summarise currently available evidence on the use of dexmedetomidine to prevent ED, reduce postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and decrease the need for rescue analgesia in paediatric patients undergoing ophthalmic surgery.
METHODS
The medical databases EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Library were searched for randomised controlled trials published between January 2020 and August 2022 that used Dexmedetomidine in paediatric patients undergoing ophthalmic surgery. The protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022343622). The review was accomplished according to the 'Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses', and the meta-analysis was conducted by using RevMan5.4. These studies examine the efficacy of dexmedetomidine in preventing ED in children undergo ophthalmic surgery. The Cochrane ROB-1 was used to assess risk of bias (ROB).
RESULTS
Eight studies comprised of 629 participants, of which 315 received dexmedetomidine and 314 placebos were examined. PAED score identified ED following surgery. A review and meta-analysis indicated that dexmedetomidine reduces ED incidence (RR = 0.39; 95% CI 0.25-0.62). Similarly, it reduces the use of rescue analgesia (RR = 0.38; 95% CI 0.25-0.57). However, dexmedetomidine did not help prevent PONV since no difference was found between groups (RR = 0.33; 95% CI 0.21-0.54).
CONCLUSION
This review showed that dexmedetomidine helped to reduce ED incidence in paediatric patients after ophthalmic surgery and reduced the need for rescue analgesia compared to placebo or other medications.
PubMed: 37386601
DOI: 10.1186/s44158-022-00079-y -
Medicine Nov 2018Dexmedetomidine (DEX) improves postoperative pain scores and prolongs the duration of blockage when combined with local anesthetics (LAs) for neuraxial and brachial... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dexmedetomidine (DEX) improves postoperative pain scores and prolongs the duration of blockage when combined with local anesthetics (LAs) for neuraxial and brachial plexus block; however, there is little information about the effectiveness of DEX as an adjuvant to LAs in paravertebral block (PVB). Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DEX combined with LAs in PVB.
METHOD
An electronic database search from inception date to February 2018 was performed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DEX as an adjuvant to LAs with LAs alone for PVB in adult patients were included. Postoperative pain scores, duration of analgesia, cumulative perioperative analgesic consumption, and adverse events were analyzed.
RESULT
We identified 7 trials enrolling 350 patients and found that DEX reduced pain scores at rest by standardized mean differences (SMD) -0.86 cm (95% confidence interval [CI] [-1.55, -0.17], P = .01) and SMD -0.93 cm (95% CI [-1.41, -0.26], P =.008) at postoperative 12 hours and 24 hours, respectively. DEX reduced pain scores while dynamic by SMD -1.63 cm (95% CI [-2.92, -0.34], P =.01) and SMD -1.78 cm (95% CI [-2.66, -0.90], P =.007) for postoperative 12 hours and 24 hours, respectively. DEX extended the duration of analgesia by weighted mean differences (WMD) 201.53 minutes (95% CI [33.45, 369.61], P =.02); and reduced cumulative postoperative analgesic consumption by WMD -7.71 mg (95% CI [-10.64, -4.78], P <.001) and WMD -45.64 mg (95% CI [-69.76, -21.53], P < .001) for 24 hours morphine and 48 hours tramadol subgroups, respectively. DEX also increased the odds of hypotension by odds ratio (OR) 4.40 (95% CI [1.37, 14.17], P = .01); however, there was no statistically significant difference for intraoperative fentanyl consumption and the incidence of the bradycardia.
CONCLUSIONS
DEX combined with LAs in PVB significantly improved postoperative pain scores, prolonged the duration of analgesia, reduced postoperative analgesic consumption, and increased the odds of hypotension. However, we cannot neglect the heterogeneity of the included RCTs. More large-scale prospective studies are needed to further clarify the above conclusions.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration number CRD42018090251.
Topics: Analgesics, Non-Narcotic; Anesthetics, Local; Brachial Plexus Block; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Pain Management; Pain Measurement; Pain, Postoperative; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 30431589
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000013164 -
Korean Journal of Anesthesiology Jun 2022While laparoscopic surgical procedures have various advantages over traditional open techniques, artificial pneumoperitoneum is associated with severe bradycardia and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
While laparoscopic surgical procedures have various advantages over traditional open techniques, artificial pneumoperitoneum is associated with severe bradycardia and cardiac arrest. Dexmedetomidine, an imidazole derivative that selectively binds to α2-receptors and has sedative and analgesic properties, can cause hypotension and bradycardia. Our primary aim was to assess the association between dexmedetomidine use and intraoperative bradycardia during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review with a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis using the following PICOS: adult patients undergoing endotracheal intubation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (P); intravenous dexmedetomidine before tracheal intubation (I); no intervention or placebo administration (C); intraoperative bradycardia (primary outcome), intraoperative hypotension, hemodynamics at intubation (systolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure, heart rate), dose needed for induction of anesthesia, total anesthesia requirements (both hypnotics and opioids) throughout the procedure, and percentage of patients requiring postoperative analgesics and experiencing postoperative nausea and vomiting and/or shivering (O); randomized controlled trials (S).
RESULTS
Fifteen studies were included in the meta-analysis (980 patients). Compared to patients that did not receive dexmedetomidine, those who did had a higher risk of developing intraoperative bradycardia (RR: 2.81, 95% CI [1.34, 5.91]) and hypotension (1.66 [0.92,2.98]); however, they required a lower dose of intraoperative anesthetics and had a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. In the trial sequential analysis for bradycardia, the cumulative z-score crossed the monitoring boundary for harm at the tenth trial.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy who receive dexmedetomidine during tracheal intubation are more likely to develop intraoperative bradycardia and hypotension.
Topics: Adult; Bradycardia; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Hypotension; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35016498
DOI: 10.4097/kja.21359 -
Paediatric Anaesthesia Feb 2019Recent experimental studies suggest that currently used anesthetics have neurotoxic effects on young animals. Clinical studies are increasingly publishing about the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Recent experimental studies suggest that currently used anesthetics have neurotoxic effects on young animals. Clinical studies are increasingly publishing about the effects of anesthesia on the long-term outcome, providing contradictory results. The selective alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist dexmedetomidine has been suggested as an alternative nontoxic sedative agent.
AIMS
The aim of this systematic review was to assess the potential neuroprotective and neurobehavioral effects of dexmedetomidine in young animals and children.
METHODS
Systematic searches separately for preclinical and clinical studies were performed in Medline Ovid and Embase on February 14, 2018.
RESULTS
The initial search found preclinical (n = 661) and clinical (n = 240) studies. A total of 20 preclinical studies were included. None of the clinical studies met the predefined eligibility criteria. Histologic injury by dexmedetomidine was evaluated in 11 studies, and was confirmed in three of these studies (caspase-3 activation or apoptosis). Decrease of injury caused by another anesthetic was evaluated in 16 studies and confirmed in 13 of these. Neurobehavioral tests were performed in seven out of the 20 studies. Of these seven rodent studies, three studies tested the effects of dexmedetomidine alone on neurobehavioral outcome in animals (younger than P21). All three studies found no negative effect of dexmedetomidine on the outcome. In six studies, outcome was evaluated when dexmedetomidine was administered following another anesthetic. Dexmedetomidine was found to lessen the negative effects of the anesthetic.
CONCLUSION
In animals, dexmedetomidine was found not to induce histologic injury and to show a beneficial effect when administered with another anesthetic. No clinical results on the long-term effects in children have been identified yet.
Topics: Adrenergic alpha-2 Receptor Agonists; Animals; Child, Preschool; Cognition; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Mental Status and Dementia Tests; Neurotoxicity Syndromes; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 30475445
DOI: 10.1111/pan.13553 -
Cureus Aug 2023Dexmedetomidine has been widely studied in many surgical settings, with possible benefits in lowering anesthetic requirements, improving perioperative hemodynamic... (Review)
Review
Dexmedetomidine in Patients Undergoing Transsphenoidal Resection of Pituitary Adenoma: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials.
Dexmedetomidine has been widely studied in many surgical settings, with possible benefits in lowering anesthetic requirements, improving perioperative hemodynamic stability, and improving postoperative outcomes. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effects of dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing transsphenoidal resection of pituitary adenoma, shedding light on its potential as an adjunctive agent in anesthesia for this specific surgical population. In this review, we searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar from inception to July 20, 2023. A total of six randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of dexmedetomidine versus placebo in patients undergoing transsphenoidal resection of pituitary adenoma were included in this review. The outcomes of interest were extracted from the included studies as mean difference (MD) and standard deviation (SD), then analyzed using the Review Manager (RevMan, RevMan International Inc., New York, USA) software. Our literature search process retrieved 274 records. Of them, six studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was a significant difference between the dexmedetomidine group compared to the placebo group in terms of heart rate at the end of the surgery (MD = -16.5; CI = [-25.36 to -7.64]; P value = 0.0003) and after extubation (MD = -16.81; CI = [-23.18 to -10.43]; P values < 0.00001). Furthermore, dexmedetomidine significantly reduced the mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) at after both intubation and extubation (MD = -9.11 and -21.5; CI = [-13.56 to -4.65] and [-30.93 to -12.06]; P values < 0.00001). This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that dexmedetomidine appears to have several potential benefits in patients undergoing transsphenoidal resection of pituitary adenoma. The use of dexmedetomidine was associated with reductions in heart rate, mean arterial blood pressure, blood loss, and duration of surgery, while showing no significant difference in propofol dose or time to extubation of the trachea.
PubMed: 37641722
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.44132 -
Medicine Oct 2020Dexmedetomidine and midazolam have become important approaches for the sedation of dental surgery. However, the comparison of these 2 drugs for the sedation of dental... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Dexmedetomidine and midazolam have become important approaches for the sedation of dental surgery. However, the comparison of these 2 drugs for the sedation of dental surgery has not been well established. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for dental surgery.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials are searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the influence of dexmedetomidine versus midazolam on dental surgery are included. Two investigators independently have searched articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. Meta-analysis is performed using the random-effect model.
RESULTS
Five RCTs and 420 patients are included in the meta-analysis. Compared with midazolam intervention for dental surgery, dexmedetomidine intervention has similar lowest SpO2, lowest heart rate and lowest systolic blood pressure, duration of surgery, and total volume of local anesthetic, but is associated with stable and reduced lowest diastolic blood pressure.
CONCLUSIONS
Similar benefits of dexmedetomidine and midazolam intervention are observed for the sedation of dental surgery in terms of SpO2, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and the volume of local anesthetic, but dexmedetomidine may result in more stable diastolic blood pressure.
Topics: Anesthetics, Local; Blood Pressure; Dexmedetomidine; Diastole; Heart Rate; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Midazolam; Operative Time; Oral Surgical Procedures; Oxygen; Systole
PubMed: 33120732
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000022288 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2017Although routine administration of pharmacologic sedation or analgesia during mechanical ventilation in preterm neonates is not recommended, its use in clinical practice... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Although routine administration of pharmacologic sedation or analgesia during mechanical ventilation in preterm neonates is not recommended, its use in clinical practice remains common. Alpha-2 agonists, mainly clonidine and dexmedetomidine, are used as adjunctive (or alternative) sedative agents alongside opioids and benzodiazepines. Clonidine has not been systematically assessed for use in neonatal sedation during ventilation.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether clonidine administered to term and preterm newborn infants receiving mechanical ventilation reduces morbidity and mortality rates. To compare the intervention versus placebo, no treatment, and dexmedetomidine; and to assess the safety of clonidine infusion for potential harms.To perform subgroup analyses according to gestational age; birth weight; administration method (infusion or bolus therapy); dose, duration, and route of clonidine administration; and pharmacologic sedation as a co-intervention.
SEARCH METHODS
We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 12) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to January 10, 2017), Embase (1980 to January 10, 2017), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; 1982 to January 10, 2017). We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized controlled trials, and cluster trials comparing clonidine versus placebo, no treatment, or dexmedetomidine administered to term and preterm newborns receiving mechanical ventilation via an endotracheal tube.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
For the included trial, two review authors independently extracted data (e.g. number of participants, birth weight, gestational age, all-cause death during initial hospitalization, duration of respiratory support, sedation scale, duration of hospital stay) and assessed risk of bias (e.g. adequacy of randomization, blinding, completeness of follow-up). This review considered primary outcomes of all-cause neonatal death, all-cause death during initial hospitalization, and duration of mechanical ventilation in days.
MAIN RESULTS
One trial, which included 112 infants, met the inclusion criteria for this review. Term newborn infants on mechanical ventilation with the need for continuous analgesia and sedation with fentanyl and midazolam were eligible for enrollment during the first 96 hours of ventilation. Study authors administered clonidine 1 μg/kg/h or placebo on day 4 after intubation.We found no differences between the two groups in all-cause death during hospitalization (risk ratio [RR] 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.12 to 3.98). The quality of the evidence supporting these findings is low owing to imprecision of the estimates (one study; few events). The median (interquartile range) duration of mechanical ventilation was 7.1 days (5.7 to 9.1 days) in the clonidine group and 5.8 days (4.9 to 7.9 days) in the placebo group, respectively (P = 0.070). Among secondary outcomes, we found no differences in terms of duration of stay in the intensive care unit. Sedation scale values (COMFORT) and analgesia scores (Hartwig) during the first 72 hours of infusion of study medication were lower in the clonidine group than in the placebo group.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
At present, evidence is insufficient to show the efficacy and safety of clonidine for sedation and analgesia in term and preterm newborn infants receiving mechanical ventilation.
Topics: Cause of Death; Clonidine; Dexmedetomidine; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Infant, Newborn; Intensive Care Units, Neonatal; Length of Stay; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiration, Artificial
PubMed: 28488361
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012468.pub2 -
International Urology and Nephrology Oct 2023There is currently no FDA-approved medical therapy for delayed graft function (DGF). Dexmedetomidine (DEX) has multiple reno-protective effects preventing ischemic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
There is currently no FDA-approved medical therapy for delayed graft function (DGF). Dexmedetomidine (DEX) has multiple reno-protective effects preventing ischemic reperfusion injury, DGF, and acute kidney injury. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the reno-protective effects of perioperative DEX during renal transplantation.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from WOS, SCOPUS, EMBASE, PubMed, and CENTRAL until June 8th, 2022. We used the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference for continuous outcomes; both presented with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We registered our protocol in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42022338898.
RESULTS
We included four RCTs with 339 patients. Pooled risk ratio found no difference between DEX and placebo in reducing DGF (RR: 0.58 with 95% CI [0.34, 1.01], p = 0.05) and acute rejection (RR: 0.88 with 95% CI [0.52, 1.49], p = 0.63). However, DEX improved short-term creatinine on day 1 (MD: - 0.76 with 95% CI [- 1.23, - 0.3], p = 0.001) and day 2 (MD: - 0.28 with 95% CI [- 0.5, - 0.07], p = 0.01); and blood urea nitrogen on day 2 (MD: - 10.16 with 95% CI [- 17.21, - 3.10], p = 0.005) and day 3 (MD: - 6.72 with 95% CI [- 12.85, - 0.58], p = 0.03).
CONCLUSION
Although there is no difference between DEX and placebo regarding reducing DGF and acute rejection after kidney transplantation, there may be some evidence that it has reno-protective benefits because we found statistically significant improvement in the short-term serum creatinine and blood urea nitrogen levels. More trials are required to investigate the long-term reno-protective effects of DEX.
Topics: Humans; Kidney Transplantation; Dexmedetomidine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Kidney
PubMed: 36997837
DOI: 10.1007/s11255-023-03568-3 -
Journal of Anesthesia Apr 2021This review compares the effects of peripheral dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine on postoperative analgesia. We included six randomized controlled trials (354 patients)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison of postoperative analgesic effects in response to either dexamethasone or dexmedetomidine as local anesthetic adjuvants: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
This review compares the effects of peripheral dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine on postoperative analgesia. We included six randomized controlled trials (354 patients) through a systematic literature search. We found that analgesia duration was comparable between dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine (58.59 min, 95% CI (confidence interval), - 66.13, 183.31 min) with extreme heterogeneity. Secondary outcome was also compared and no significant difference was observed in sensory block onset and duration and motor block duration and also for postoperative nausea and vomiting. It is noteworthy that dexamethasone reduced analgesic consumption (fentanyl) by 29.12 mcg compared with dexmedetomidine. We performed subgroup analyses and found no significant difference between the following: (1) lidocaine vs ropivacaine (P = 0.28), (2) nerve block vs nerve block + general anesthesia (P = 0.47), and (3) upper limb surgery vs thoracoscopic pneumonectomy (P = 0.27). We applied trial sequential analysis to assess the risks of type I and II errors and concluded that the meta-analysis was insufficiently powered to answer the clinical question, and further analysis is needed to establish which adjuvant is better. In conclusion, we believe that existing research indicates that dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine have equivalent analgesic effects in peripheral nerve blocks.
Topics: Adjuvants, Anesthesia; Anesthetics, Local; Dexamethasone; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33515302
DOI: 10.1007/s00540-021-02895-y